I am a Marxist in China
Orthodox Marxists in the Chinese internet community often view Russia and Iran as weak links in imperialism, rather than as anti-imperialist forces .However, in the view of Chinese Marxists, opposing the global hegemony of the United States takes precedence over opposing secondary imperialisms (Iran, Russia).
The person in the picture is Yang Heping, a US citizen with a Chinese green card, and he is the most popular orthodox Marxist-Leninist-Maoist self-media figure on the Chinese internet (with 3 million followers on Tiktok and 800,000 on Bilibili). Yang Heping advocates that whether it’s Ukraine, Russia, or Iran, “the truth is on the side of the proletariat, not on the side of any government or capitalist.”
In China, those who unconditionally support Iran and Russia are usually nationalists or national leftists.
I wonder if the differences between the left-wing in Europe and America and the left-wing in China are really that significant?
我觉得你根本不想和我有任何交流，你纯粹是来找茬来了，随便你怎么解读
You don’t get to shut down like that. You have made serious allegations so you have to back them up. If you back down at the first chance of breaking down your internal logic then it does not really look like your here to explore marxism here but make your impositions known to us. You can answer these questions, you may find your answers enlighten us.
If you don’t answer these questions then you will give the impression you are trolling here.
Is it not the more challenging questions that help us explore truly further? Is that not the Lacanist consideration?
Furthermore, you have presented views as his; I am questioning his views. That is on purpose so that you don’t feel it is a personal attack on you. If you then feel that even that distancing is still too offensive then please feel free to reframe my questions so you can still answer them.
我觉得你就是在倒打一耙扣帽子。
“Would that mean a country must first become socialist before it can engage in warfare in another country to prevent ethnic cleansing otherwise it has engaged in imperialism?”这种二极管式结论除了你在暗示我和他在支持种族灭绝、美帝国主义之外，我完全想不到任何理由。
我在最初与其他人的回复已经明确提到过了，他对帝国主义的判断是基于当前国家的金融资本、垄断资本比例，对待本国资本主义政府抵抗入侵应该是利用，而不是支持。就像是日本帝国入侵中国时，利用国民党，支持中国共产党一样。
Rather than presume you could instead answer the question. You could, for example, explain how a capitalist country could engage in warfare to prevent ethnic cleansing without it being considered imperialism.
“谁主张谁举证”，你不如先回答我这个世界上有多少资本主义国家，是以“阻止种族清洗”为根本目的才主动或参加对外发动战争的。
Don’t move the goalpost. Furthermore, it is your own claim that is being tested.
Even with presumption of something never been done before does not mean it can’t; such a presumption is metaphysical, ahistorical and anti-scientific, and certainly not dialectical materialist.
There are various times in history the bourgoisie has collaborated with their domestic proleteriat in order to kick out an imperialist power to prevent ethnic cleansing of its proleteriat - pretty much the story of nearly every country that ended formal colonisation, especially those that did not have a socialist revolution following that ie remained capitalist. You already know this which is why you put the qualifier “foreign” as if this then gets you out of your own trap. It is not a stretch of the imagination to consider the Nazi Ukrainians as a proxy of US foreign policy, similar to DPP of Taiwan.
Just answer the question mate, if you can.
这分明是你在设置语言陷阱。
是的“历史上，资产阶级曾多次与本国无产阶级合作，驱逐帝国主义列强，以防止其无产阶级遭受种族清洗——这几乎是所有结束正式殖民统治的国家的共同经历，尤其是那些之后没有发生社会主义革命、仍然是资本主义国家的国家。”我从来没有否定这一点。
那你判断“抵抗种族清洗的标准”是什么，我的标准已经明确了，“基于该国资本主义的发展阶段”。你说“资产阶级曾多次与本国无产阶级合作，驱逐帝国主义列强，以防止其无产阶级遭受种族清洗”，我承认这是伊朗正在做的事情，“伊朗此时本国境内正在抵抗美国”，这同样也是阳和平承认的事情。
“但是”俄罗斯不是在“俄罗斯境内抵抗种族清洗”，俄罗斯是在“乌克兰境内抵抗种族清洗”。我恰恰就是对此心知肚明，所以才加上“外国”这个限定词，俄罗斯在一个灰色地带，在本国国境线之外“抵抗种族清洗”标准是什么，你怎么界定。“欧盟干预南斯拉夫内战”说自己在保障民族独立、抵抗种族清洗，“美国干预台海、新疆”也说在保障民族独立、抵抗种族清洗，现在这个世界上所有帝国主义干涉都会说说自己在抵抗种族清洗，你的标准是什么
Did the ethnic cleansing happen? Is there a historical precedent of Lebensraum? Has that been effectively attempted to be continued with NATO? What slowed /stop the ethnic cleansing from happening? Does Russia like the US and Europe here have an extensive history of colour revolutions and regime change? If not, why flatten their claims?
Authorship of those making the claims, whether the claims are happening and historical precedent can help guage what’s happening. It makes the abstract more concrete.
(Furthermore, as marxists when considering nations we should consider nations of peoples rather than just the bourgoisie border that encloses them.)
还有一点必须指出的是，我知道在欧美“民族”与“种族”强绑定，但是在中国不是这样的，“中华民族”并不是指“汉族”，而是56个民族合并起来的多元化民族体系，比如“旗袍”，旗袍是满族服饰现代化而来，但是任何中国民族主义者都会将其自豪的视为自己民族服饰。
汉族主义者（皇汉）有自己的种族认同感，他们极端排斥蒙古族、满族传统和服饰，也排斥中华多元民族这个概念。
如果没有中华人民共和国改变旧中国的封建传统和分配秩序（通过阶级斗争），中华民族这个概念可能就会解体
“种族清洗真的发生过吗？历史上是否存在“生存空间”的先例？北约是否曾有效地延续过这一理念？是什么减缓/阻止了种族清洗的发生？俄罗斯是否像美国和欧洲一样，有着丰富的“颜色革命”和政权更迭历史？如果没有，为何要否定他们的说法？”
俄罗斯当然有颠覆政权的历史，格鲁吉亚、克里米亚、德左。而如果你首先要考虑民族而不是资产阶级性质，那么这就完全是一个站队的问题，取决于你相信谁的说法。
如果站在这些被颠覆政权民族的一边，那么就是他们在“自由”的基于民族意愿加入北约，是俄罗斯在种族清洗；如果站在俄罗斯的一边，就是对北约扩张的防御性攻击、以及保护俄罗斯族的免受这些国家的种族主义迫害。
中国则是另一个很好的对照组，西方对中国新疆的质控完全是基于口供的阴谋论式闭环，一个涉及百万人的事件没有任何图像证据足以证明其指控的荒诞，中国从来没有以“防御性进攻”为理由进攻任何一个国家，哪怕像印尼真的爆发了血腥的种族屠杀
Stated goals infamously often don’t align with actual goals. Like US food aid to Palestine actual goal was to lure more Palestinians to the open for easy slaughter.